Tuesday, May 16, 2006

A Hard Post To Write

It has become impossible to ignore the lastest round of accusations of Rabbinic abuse in Yeshivas. I found it difficult to take seriously the anonoblogger who had been covering this story up until now - it's hard to get past the obvious personal agenda and manic rantings that he espoused, whether or not the story was true - but now that there is a lawsuit filed, and a detailed mainstream media story out there that quotes a victim under his real name, it's time to comment.

This story makes me ill on so many levels. The ones most obviously hurt by this are the direct victims of this horrible alleged crime, both past, and God forbid, future. Every new child that is put into danger by leaving a known or suspected pedophile in a position to strike again is being failed by anyone who is at all aware of any accusations, be it their Rabbis, teachers, administrators or the entire community. I cry for these victims.

The question then is, whether there actually exists a concerted effort to cover up these types of crimes in our Yeshivas and communities. And the answer seems to be a clear yes. The incredibly sad part of this mess is that this is not a story line that we're seeing played out for the first time. Ten years ago, there was a similar story of alleged abuse in the Yeshiva system. The allegations were ignored time and time again. The accused was shockingly allowed to remain in a position where he was in constant contact with youths, and was enabled to keep up with his depraved behavior. Any attempts by victims or their advocates to bring up the issue were stonewalled. In the end, the whole sordid mess was played out in the press, in the most public possible manner.

The story here seems to be following the same script. The allegations were ignored, the accused was allowed to remain in contact with defenseless children without a real attempt to uncover the truth, and the story has broken in the mainstream media in a way that has brought nothing but shame upon our community. This shouldn't be. This culture of denial has allowed the pool of victims of this crime to balloon in a way that is completely unecessary and terribly tragic. Does anyone really believe that those with pedophilic tendencies are anything but sick, sick people, who need psychological and/or psychiatric assistance, and most importantly, to be immediately removed from positions that allow them to abuse again? Does anyone really believe that they are doing these perpetrators a favor when they are allowed to remain in these positions to "save face"? That the direct victims of the abuse are being failed in the worst possible way is evident. But how about the families of the accused? Do they benefit from the burying of this story, especially in a case such as this, when the attempted coverup ultimately subjects them - and the whole Orthodox community - to the public embarassment of a mainstream media story?

155 Comments:

This issue scares me so much. My son is almost 4 and very friendly and open and I am so scared some rebbe or teacher or older boy is going to take advantage of him. And I am so sad that I have to worry about this.

Can we not convict the rabbi in question until all the facts have been brought to bear? All we have so far are accusations and hearsay. SIW has been the most balanced blogger on this to date. Before the hand-wringing begins it would be nice to get some FACTS on this, don't you think?

I think part of the reason why schools are not coming forward to report their abusive staff is because the school loses face. Losing face means the school loses its reputation and kids get pulled out. The irony though, is that parents would have MORE respect for a school that comes forward honestly and quickly. Those schools are the safest place for our children.

Is what appropriate? that the community is hosting him? Are you assuming the community voted to have him visit? Are you suggesting that the community at large send him home? What kind of comment is that? It sounds like your real issue is with Rabbi Ginzberg, and I don't what that has to do with the price of rice in China.

OM, I'm sure this post was difficult to write, and in truth, it's difficult to read as well. It's far easier to look away, but then I look at the rest of the world today. I find myself talking to my kids about things my parents never spoke to me about.

Far be it from us to decide who is innocent and who is guilty -- on both civil and Jewish levels -- but everyone loses when there's a Chilul HaShem on such a level, and when the institutions that were meant to protect our children prove otherwise.

I only first read UOJ a day ago when this story hit the press. On your comment about his "obvious personal agenda and manic rantings," what would your response be if you had definitive proof that horrible criminal activity was happening and everyone ignored you? Perhaps you wouldn't have the same reaction as him, but I hope you would display more anger than you direct towards Lawrence school politics.

Can we not convict the rabbi in question until all the facts have been brought to bear? All we have so far are accusations and hearsay. SIW has been the most balanced blogger on this to date. Before the hand-wringing begins it would be nice to get some FACTS on this, don't you think?

Well, yes. I'm the first to commend Steven I. Weiss on his coverage, and did so in his comments. That said, he was addressing the NY Magazine coverage in specific in his post. SIW has been rightly handwringing on the larger subject of clergy abuse for a very long time. And that larger subject is what I am addressing here.

Bravo, OM! Beautiful. This post is the first I have seen that doesnt point fingers or name names, but addresses what has been done wrong and what the ramifications are. I also like the nonjudgemental attitude you use towards the accused. They are definitely sick, and should have bee helped, not enabled.

If the New York article is built on a house of cards, and you recognize that, why are you hand-wringing now?

Because it isn't built on a house of cards. The foundation, the direct account of an victim is very strong. It's where the article goes from there that SIW is critical of. And about the hadwringing? This is my blog. I handwring here.

Unfortunately, this story is based on more than just accusations and hearsay. If you are genuinely interested in helping the victims and helping prevent future abuse in your childrens' schools and camps (and not just fishing for "hock"), there are people to contact. For more specific information you can contact bes1267@yahoo.com.

If someone has pedophilic tendencies and ACTS on them, and it can be proven in a court of law, he should be sent to jail. This is not just a sickness, it's a criminal act. If Catholic priests are being sent to jail for such crimes, I don't see why Jewish teachers and rabbis shouldn't also be sent to jail - again, after conviction.

Very responsible post AS ALWAYS. I don't think there should be names posted or specifics. However, this subject is an important one that must be adressed. Thank you Orthomom for doing so in a restrained and balanced manner, yet without burying your head (or trying to bury your readers' heads!) in the sand. Shkoyach.

Orthomom....It was only a matter of time that this story was going to hit the media. It's funny how come are commenting on what a chilul hashem it is, why? Becuase it's now in the public? What exactly is the chilul here? The fact that a Rebbi in a Yeshiva (probably) molested children? Or now (nebuch) it is in public? Let's all get out priorities straightened out here!! How much can the Rabbonim look away at all the terrible things "heimishe" Jews are doing today before they will do anything!?!?!

Did you have to go there? Obviously it's a horrible story. Horrible for the victim, his family, the accused rabbi's family (to hell with Margo) and the orthodox world at large. BUT, you posting on this topic is also a travesty.

This post will accomplish nothing, as you are not an insider, and will only cause people to spout things they are in no position to comment.

When you host other people's comments about Gedolim (and no I am not talking about Kolko, Margo or the Cannonist), Gedolim who we are so far removed from, and allow it to go on, you become an accomplice to besmirching Talmidei Chachomim who, to quote R' Eliezer, are Marbim Shalom Ba'Olam.

But nobody has established whether ONE such Jew has acted poorly here, much less that MANY such Jew are doing "many terrible things."

Talk about showing your bias!

Um...did you read his comment? He wasn't referring to this case, but of other instances of Orthodox people doing things that perpetuate a Chillul Hashem, and the Rabbanim not commenting on it. I certainly was not referring to the case at hand.

"Are you referring to this particular anon blogger or all anon blogger's with obvious personal agendas."

Let's be real. The site under discussion is full of the lowest kind of rumor-mongering and mudslinging imaginable. every day countless alleged wrongdoers are identified by name without any evidence. Contrast with this blog, while also anon, couldn't be starker.

Are you referring to this particular anon blogger or all anon blogger's with obvious personal agendas. Or is anon blogging OK as long as you create the appearance of fair and balanced?

I find it difficult to use anonobloggers as a source for alleged facts without independent verification. That goes for my blog as well. Most of my posts are my opinions, based on sourced news stories. When they are based on community hearsay, I indicate as such, which certainly takes away from the item's credibility.

I don't consider myself a news source by any stretch of the imagination, and don't think people treat my blog as such.

I am thinking about commenting on the subject at hand soon. But, I'm still torn about the angle I want my future post to take.

I will say that it is high time that we enact some safeguards in our schools and camps. In addition, I think that the problem of secrecy and having no impartial place to turn with concerns like these, is related to the problem that each and every school is so independent, rather than community owned and controlled.

Back in the old days, as I understand it, the non-Jewish authorities allowed each Jewish community to impose taxes on its members, and to impose fines and/or corporal punishment on members who violated halakha (including the halakhot forbidding theft, rape, and so forth).

Now, we don't have that autonomy, but we still have the norm that if someone tells the police about a fellow-frummie's criminal behavior, the informant deserves more opprobrium than the alleged criminal.

"Let's be real. The site under discussion is full of the lowest kind of rumor-mongering and mudslinging imaginable. every day countless alleged wrongdoers are identified by name without any evidence."

Hey Glengary- while you could be right about the blog in question, lets not assume that just because another blog might look nice, use bullet points, separate paragraphs, and links to other blogs as "source material," that suddenly the difference is so stark that the nice looking blog becomes a beacon of journalistic fact-finding virtue. Lets not judge a blog by it "cover." Even orthomom concedes that the onset of a lawsuit has lent credence to the accusations contained in UOJ. Perhaps, some of its other accusations will in the future stand the course of time prove to be true.

I disagree with the notion that the difference between this blog and the blog in question (BIQ) is that this blog "look[s] nice, use[s] bullet points, separate paragraphs, and links to other blogs as 'source material.'" The BIQ peddles in trash and no amount of prettyfying can change that. This contrast IS stark.

"Most of my posts are my opinions, based on sourced news stories. When they are based on community hearsay, I indicate as such, which certainly takes away from the item's credibility...I don't consider myself a news source by any stretch of the imagination, and don't think people treat my blog as such."

Whether facts or opinions, anonymity certainly skews the opinions of your readership. I am sure your blog neighbors (and 5 towns neighbors for that matter) will certainly take different views of your opinions and perceptions if they truly knew the source of the opinion. (Beyond being a mother of 4 young children- a most admirable trait).

Again, I am not reporting. My credibility isn't as issue here. People don't read op-eds in certain newspapers because they necessarily have cred as news sources, so much as they read them for a source of opinions. I view my blog as the same.

Did you have to go there? Obviously it's a horrible story. Horrible for the victim, his family, the accused rabbi's family (to hell with Margo) and the orthodox world at large. BUT, you posting on this topic is also a travesty.

This post will accomplish nothing, as you are not an insider, and will only cause people to spout things they are in no position to comment.

When you host other people's comments about Gedolim (and no I am not talking about Kolko, Margo or the Cannonist), Gedolim who we are so far removed from, and allow it to go on, you become an accomplice to besmirching Talmidei Chachomim who, to quote R' Eliezer, are Marbim Shalom Ba'Olam

How wrong you are, OrthoKrum. Posts like this accomplish everything. In fact the only reason the Kolko travesty is being exposed after 25 years of intimidation and secrecy is because of posts like this and other blogs that allow people to investigate horrific crimes anonymously without fear of retribution. True, people should be careful before throwing out wild accusations, but the truth in this case will eventually be revealed during the course of the lawsuits when witnesses and victims come forward and tell their stories. As for the gedolim, true gedolim do not have to fear blogs and anonymous posts. No one is beyond reproach -our religion is about revering G-d- not other human beings.

And by the way, an individual with his/her own computer setting a forum by his/her self for his/her own opinions is not the same as an op-ed writer who has been invited to publish (be it regularly or once)in a credible mainstream news outlet, be it WSJ, NYT, FT, WP or any other publication.

And by the way, an individual with his/her own computer setting a forum by his/her self for his/her own opinions is not the same as an op-ed writer who has been invited to publish (be it regularly or once)in a credible mainstream news outlet, be it WSJ, NYT, FT, WP or any other publication.

Um...of course! What part of this don't you understand? I am not looking to be viewed as a credible source of news. This post is certainly not breaking news It's my take on the news.

Anonymous said..."If someone has pedophilic tendencies and ACTS on them, and it can be proven in a court of law, he should be sent to jail."

Now, who would disagree with a statement like that? Of course, IF that happens, then the individual should be jailed.

The issue here is, DID the individual in question perpetrate the act. Until that is established, can we stay away from meaningless statements like the one above?

2:30 PM

Anon of 2:30 PM, I was making a different point. I was responding to OM's statement that "people with pedophilic tendences" are "sick, sick people, who need psychological and/or psychiatric assistance." Even if pedophiles are sick, their actions must be treated as crimes, and punished as crimes. It's not only a matter of keeping them away from children to prevent future abuse.

What I find hard for you to understand, is just because you have an opinion - er rather a "take on the news" - and a computer, does not make you the same as any old op-ed writer or TV talking head, as you just reminded us. Moreover, since you do it anonymously, you are, and the context of your opinions are, the same as the rest of the anonymous bloggers out there. Not worth the time that I have wasted to explain this to you.

What I find hard for you to understand, is just because you have an opinion - er rather a "take on the news" - and a computer, does not make you the same as any old op-ed writer or TV talking head, as you just reminded us. Moreover, since you do it anonymously, you are, and the context of your opinions are, the same as the rest of the anonymous bloggers out there. Not worth the time that I have wasted to explain this to you.

Sigh. You obviously need some help with reading comprehension. I AGREE WITH YOU. I am an anonoblogger, and have no credibility whatsoever as a news source. I don't claim to. But I object to treating other anonobloggers as news sources as well.

Posts like this.....allow people to investigate??? How so? All Mom did was talk about the story and how terrible it was/is - which it is. (And of course tell us her opinion - what else is new)

I am not worried about how Gedolim would fear or defend themselves from blogs and posts. I was directing my comment at those that lash out at Gedolim, for Mom's sake. And by the way, they are beyond reproach. Not beyond questioning and challenging, but yes, they are beyond reproach.

it's hard to get past the obvious personal agenda and manic rantings that he espoused,

Personal agenda? You disqualified him because of his personal agenda? The only agenda that mattered, the agenda that was front and center in all of UOJ's posts was this: A predator is on the losse and must be stopped.

That's an agenda that should be supported. The issue wasn't his agenda, or even the fact taht he was anonymous, but that absent names and dates he had no credibility and came across as a ranting lunatic.

Posts like this.....allow people to investigate??? How so? All Mom did was talk about the story and how terrible it was/is - which it is. (And of course tell us her opinion - what else is new)

I am not worried about how Gedolim would fear or defend themselves from blogs and posts. I was directing my comment at those that lash out at Gedolim, for Mom's sake. And by the way, they are beyond reproach. Not beyond questioning and challenging, but yes, they are beyond reproach.

Simple, OrthoKrum. After the publicity attracted to the issue because of UOJ, victims of Kolko were given a resource through which they could communicate and eventually act. This blog is no different - a forum for people to communicate and join forces to act with increased knowledge and strength - should the need arise - whether on the issue of schoolboard elections, pedophilia, or anything else. It's not the only way to accomplish things, but it's an increasingly effective means. As for the posuk you attempt to quote, is this the one you are referring to? שמעיה ואבטליון קיבלו מהם שמעיהאומר אהוב את המלאכה ושנוא את הרבנות ואל תתוודע לרשותI believe the correct translation is as follows:Shemayah and Avtalion received the Torah from them. Shemayah said: Love work; despise high positions; and do not become too close to the authorities/government. Your point, exactly?

Not at all. When you are dealing with such a horrific story, I believe that it is very tricky territory. It leads to dangerous conversation that is peripheral to the subject - like bashing R' Scheinberg.

It's not something that should be talked about as loosely as the school budget.

Orthomom shouldn't post about it (although she didn't actually say anything bad in her post) because of what it can lead to, and it would be on her head.

why limit the abuse to sexual? how about the rebbe who beat the crap out of you when you didnt know where he was holding in the gemarah. or the verbal abuse cause you didnt understand toisfos. the bottom line is that teachers should be srceened by homeland or hiemishland security before they can be allowed near children.

I'm truly shocked that you'd joke about a mishnah in pirkei avos. Posting like this and distorting the words of luminaries such as Shmaya and Avtalyon is indeed a travesty and a true lack of respect for our gedolim.

The only Gadol, in this story is R' Scheinberg. So far all we have is that some beat writer for a tabloid told us that someone, possibly Margo, told him that R' Scheinberg told Margo something that may or may not be relevant to Margo's problem. Let us not get too upset about this just yet.....Would you agree?

Anon:You can go to R' Ginsburg's house and talk to him about it and ask him. Can you bash him? No. He's not Margo and he's not even your local Rabbi. I'm not a close minded "right winger" but in fact am a skeptic too. However, you as a frum, Yorei Shomayim, have to know when to shoot off with your mouth, and when to shoot off with your mouth with respect and reverence. That's all I'm pointing out.

Orthokrum:Only to the extent that we do not close our eyes to obvious truths and, worse, heinous acts, all in the name of giving kovod to gedolim. That's a pretty low standard, don't you think? How does blindly following a rav or "rebbe" help us in any way? An example that comes to mind is those who pay big bucks to whatever hot, new rabbi comes to town for "brochos" that are doled out to the privileged, connected few. That's not kovod - that's the pathetic, superstitious and desperate act of a person with little real connection to frumkeit and torah. We no longer live in the shtetl where only a few were educated and knowledgeable and the rest had to rely unquestioningly on the town sage. Of course we must imbue our children with respect for their rebbeim and roshei yeshiva, but as adults, we know better when we see how most frum institutions simply follow the money trail, and we watch gedolim themselves giving kovod to people of highly questionable virtue, simply because of their perceived net worth. I wish I had your emunas chachamim, but simply living life has eroded whatever blind faith in I once had in most so-called gedolim.

You are right, but it shouldn't have had an effect on your emunas chachomim. You are mixing (as someone once put it to me so well) mid-level managers from the big boys. My goal and your goal should be to know the difference, to know who is untouchable and who is not (even if we do disagree with them).

Just because someone comes to town and makes a big todo doesn't make him a gadol, but it also shouldn't effect your emunas chachomim from those who deserve it.

So far all we have is that some beat writer for a tabloid told us that someone, possibly Margo, told him that R' Scheinberg told Margo something that may or may not be relevant to Margo's problem.

Wrong, orthokrum. It's not some beat writer, it's two federal complaints. And it's not "someone, possibly Margo, told him that R' Scheinberg told Margo something that may or may not be relevant to Margo's problem," it's "Margo" telling Rabbi Scheinberg "to contact victims and tell them they were not actually abused and have no claim to bring." This is what the complaints say.

The suit says Margo directed Rabbi Scheinberg to contact. The suit uses that to show Margo's attempt to intimidate the plaintiff. Whether R' Scheinberg did contact the victim is not clear (at least not from the suit). Or do we know for a fact that R' Scheinberg did make contact?

"This is what the complaint says" So therefore, who said that Margo told Scheinberg to call the victims and tell them they have no claim?

The plaintiffs, not "some beat writer."

The suit says Margo directed Rabbi Scheinberg to contact. The suit uses that to show Margo's attempt to intimidate the plaintiff. Whether R' Scheinberg did contact the victim is not clear (at least not from the suit).

Well, when you say that someone directed someone else to do something, it is pretty much implicit that the guy actually did it. And, in any event, what would be the point of the allegation if the direction wasn't followed?

My only point is that the source of the Rabbi Scheinberg allegation is the lawsuit, not the article.

Yes, but you came into a discussion about R' Scheinberg's role. You brought the suit as proof that he did play a role, and I'm asking you if the suit proves it.

"And, in any event, what would be the point of the allegation if the direction wasn't followed?"The point would be to show Margo's intent to intimidate. Whether or not R' Scheinberg followed his direction, the fact that Margo attempted to have him make contact, would incriminate Margo and accomplish the goal of the suit.

The issue of whether or not OM, a self-proclaimed non-gossipmonger, should have blogged about this topic at all is difficult and challenging.

On the one hand, OM is not as “evil” as UOJ from a hateful rhetoric perspective but, on the other, UOJ – taken at his word - has a helluva lot more to be pissed about, in light of his past experiences with “the beards,” not to mention his obvious intimate ties to one or more of the alleged victims.

Back to the first hand, if these allegations are true, nothing can be more important than engaging in open, mainstream dialogue about these previously “taboo” issues (something that was impossible in the pre-blog era), but only if such dialogue is with a view towards effectively accomplishing the establishment of a secure educational environment for our children, and the restoration of dignity and respect to the title “Rabbi.”

This aspect of “scandal” publication is NOT -- as some would say -- a “chilul Hashem.” In fact, it is precisely the opposite (if true). It is a kiddush Hashem of epic proportions that freaks and frauds holding themselves out as Rabbonim will finally be brought to justice.

It is a kiddush Hashem that even after 25 years of sweeping this issue under the rug, real frum rabbinic authorities will ultimately step forward and acknowledge that this sickness is also rampant in our community (albeit potentially to a lesser extent than society generally – maybe).

It is a kiddush Hashem to know that “Orthodox” Jews – and even REAL Rabbis – have human urges and sicknesses and yet, despite those urges and sicknesses, most of us – and most Rabbonim - rise above such evil inclinations -- not necessarily inclinations to molest a child, but for myriad other sins -- and conduct themselves in a manner which, for the most part, sets us apart from other segments of society.

The fact that today, as a result of scandal publication, there’s an actual chance that my children will – unlike me – truly respect a Rov and a Rabbi by default until proven otherwise, is an absolute kiddush Hashem. Unfortunately, in my mind, the default thought process has always been vice versa.

BUT, ON THE LATTER HAND, IF THESE ALLEGATIONS ARE FALSE, NOTHING CAN BE MORE DESTRUCTIVE, HATEFUL OR HURTFUL THAN FALSE ACCUSATIONS OF SEXUAL IMPROPRIETIES WITH YOUNG CHILDREN. END OF STORY.

…..But, facts are facts and the only thing we know to be fact at this point (for purposes of this situation and this blog), is that OM has indeed blogged about this topic. So now that it’s out there, I'll take the bait. Here are my thoughts:

At the outset, I want to be abundantly clear that I personally know the accused individuals (both the pedophile and his criminal accomplices) as an alum of YTT, and I do not conclusively know the identities of UOJ or any of the accusers (other than the plaintiff named in the article). Also, it's worth reiterating that I'm proceeding on the assumption that these allegations are true, something that is certainly FAR from proven to most of us.

The accused molester is a sick, sick man. The acts described in the article are those of someone who has a uniquely serious - possibly uncontrollable - disease. That's no excuse, of course, and he should be locked up for life. Let's hope Herman finds an SOL loophole. But it’s the accused acts’ themselves which are the chilul Hashem, not any well-intentioned publication of his horrific acts by others.

The “co-conspirators” who, for years, looked the other way are clearly criminals. Their heads should roll along-side (or even in front of) the accused pedophile for subjecting decades of children, including me, to potential life-ruining abuse. To be clear, I was not a victim of the accused molester, but I’m certainly among the thousands of victims of these irresponsible and selfish individuals who hid behind the veil of “halacha” for all these years. These guys threw thousands of young children in front of a moving truck; thankfully, far less than that number were splattered all over the street.

Now to my main point - the REAL chilul Hashem on which some, but very few, have been focused. Again, everyone deserves the benefit of the doubt, so I can only assume that these facts on which I’m basing my rant are untrue. Nevertheless, this must be clarified.

Both on UOJ’s blog and in the New York Magazine article, a certain Rosh Yeshiva – considered by many to be a Posek Hador – is accused of uttering a “psak” that is far beyond what the Torah intended or envisioned to capture within the meaning of “chilul Hashem.” The alleged “psak” was that, notwithstanding hearing the victims’ accounts of the heinous acts perpetrated by the accused pedophile, since no “penetration” was alleged to have occurred, no halachic grounds existed to remove this individual or report him to the authorities.

At the very least, without getting graphic, I hope that the reports simply and ignorantly omitted the fact that the victims did not claim the existence of an act of Onanism, which is indisputably a biblical prohibition.

To me, even if Talmudic scholars can debate whether or not the acts described in the article constituted a halachic violation, the mere fact that a “Posek Hador” can be on the record as having – in effect – permitted the ongoing molestation of a 12-year-old boy on the halachic grounds of non-penetration, is the greatest “chilul Hashem” imaginable.

This alleged psak is analogous to the 9/11 terrorists relying on the Koran to kill in excess of 3000 people. If any reputable Muslim world leader would be accused of standing behind such position, the majority of Muslim reputable leaders would IMMEDIATELY condemn their fellow leader and his position. Moreover, if the Muslim leader did not in fact make the alleged statement, within minutes of being notified that such statements were attributed to him, he would vehemently deny all allegations and set the world straight as to the Koran’s precise position on the issue.

To my knowledge, the Posek Hador in question has not issued a statement denying these “psak allegations,” nor has he admitted to issuing the psak and subsequently retracting it and, in fact, has not issued any public comment AT ALL on this topic.

Consequently, the average Joe, frum or not frum, jewish or non-jewish, is led to believe that rubbing your ***** against a twelve-year-old boy in an effort to arouse yourself, is an act that is permissible under Jewish law. Is there any possible chilul Hashem greater than leading people to believe that Orthodox Judaism, as an institutional policy, does not condemn pleasuring yourself by placing your hand down a young boy’s pants on your lap in a car?

The accused pedophile is just one sick man, which most people can view as an exception (even if a few more sickos exist). But this is about WAY more than just one man; this psak is about a religion that, ostensibly, does not allow you to walk behind a woman in the street, yet allows you to molest little boys!!!

Before anything else, the record must be set straight as to what exactly the “torah view” is on non-penetrating pedophiles. I know it sounds sick, but what’s really sick is that this point was not addressed and clarified by the Poskei Hador within minutes of the NY Mag publication or the psak’s appearance on UOJ’s blog.

I cannot get into a detailed analysis at the moment, but PLEASE publicize to ALL that any man-on-man touching of a sexual nature, whether on the hand, foot or anywhere else, and whether with clothing off, on, through a sheet or otherwise, is absolutely and unequivocally forbidden by the Torah. In fact, it was read from the Torah this past week (“Lo sikrivu l’galos ervasa,” which applies to all arayos, including mishkav zachor). According to the overwhelming majoring and prevailing view, this prohibition applies to male on male sexual “touching” as well, and applies irrespective of penetration or the existence of an act of Onanism. Period.

And that’s not even taking into account the element of imputed force involved in this case, and the minor’s incapacity to consent to any act, let alone a sexual act.

I am deeply saddened and sickened to be associated with a religion in which our greatest leaders have neither denied nor commented on this outrageous allegation made by UOJ and the New York Times Magazine about a Posek Hador. And this Posek Hador is now in the US, so he -- or at least his multiple assistants who found the time to call people for donations -- is undoubtedly aware of the existence of this article and its content.

My hope is that my facts are just completely wrong, or I’m simply out of the loop and totally missed the public statement issued by “daas torah.” And my hope is that these accusations against the accused and his co-conspirators are found to be completely and totally fabricated, and that UOJ is in fact the real monster.

BUT, if the accusations are in fact true, UOJ is not the great villain, but instead a real life super-hero, single-handedly accomplishing what no one else was capable of doing for the last 30 years. And through his bluster and action, the lives of thousands of OUR children have been saved. You may not like his style (as Yakov did not like the style of Shimon and Levi in Shechem), but his accomplishments are historical.

The dust will settle on this nightmare scandal and, in all probability, this consequences will primarily relate to individuals – either the world realization of the destruction of the lives of the victims by virtue of the abuse and the silence, or the destruction of the lives of the accused pedophile and his co-conspirators by virtue of being falsely accused. But what will NEVER go away is the indelible impression left on potentially hundreds of thousands of people worldwide that Orthodox Judaism – with all its rules and regulations – with all the no hand-shaking between opposite sexes in the workplace – permits a 40-year-old man to fondle, molest and stick his hands down the pants of a 12-year-old boy, so long as no penetration occurs.

What saddens me is that we are all being played for fools. There will be no mention of this in any sort of Yeshivishe medium. The Yated et al will keep going as if nothing happened. The Gedolim are, evidently, Ketanim. When those who are boiling inside from the outrage of these events, stop placing our "leadership" on a pedestal we will be placated. Where is a statment from ANYONE of our leaders? Are they scared to stand up to Margulies? When we expect nothing from them, we can accomplish everything. UOJ is proof.

I don't mean this in a rude fashion at all---but I am very impressed that you used "we." You, after all, are part of the problem, Orthomom. As you point out in your very first paragraph, *you* ignored early warnings because you judged their source to be non-credible. Essentially, you participated in a "concerted effort to cover up these types of crimes..."

Great post by halachic authority!I just want to make a point - without naming names (hamevin yavin). There is a 30 year old who was recently arrested after arranging a tryst online with a young boy who turned out to be the police (and allegedly this is not his first misdeed). . . this is a frum guy from a choshav family. There is no excuse for his actions (and yes many molested children turn out fine), however, he says he was molested as a child, and in all probability nobody believed him back then. If the frum community keeps burying their heads in the sand about these issues - IT WONT GO AWAY - the cycle will Chas V'shalom repeat and repeat.Kudos orthomom on the post - it's not just this particular story its the topic that needs discussion - in every town and every school board.

I find this topic utterly frightening . . . but not because of the presence of predators in our community or the larger society! When I hear language like "horrific" and analogies that liken inappropriate behaviors to killing children, I realize that we have become a mob. It doesn't mean we are wrong; it just means that we are no longer using logic and compassion, but are running on unbridled emotion alone.

I wonder what victims of abuse must think when they such discussion? Do they think, "This was a very bad thing that happened to me but from which I can recover," or do they think, "Being molested or assaulted is obviously such a horrible thing that I'll never feel any better." And which attitude is better for their potential recovery from the experience.

I once received what I believe was excellent advice from a Rav on educating children about potential predators: he said, in short, "the Torah does not permit people (who are not married to each other) to touch one another in areas normally covered by your swimsuit. Someone who does this is acting inappropriately, and you must leave his/her presence as soon as possible and tell an adult."

Now, I realize that predators play on the secrecy aspect, etc., but I admire the no-drama, no-fuss way it was presented: This is wrong, it may happen to you, and it's the perpetrator's fault. There's nothing wrong with children learning to turn down unwanted advances -- almost every teenage girl has to learn to do it!

So, yes, we need to make sure such individuals are not placed in positions of trust, but we also need to tone down our hysteria a little. Less hysteria will actually make victims *more* likely to seek help and/or report abuse, and we will avoid creating an environment in which false accusations can flourish.

Fox, you nailed it. The issue here is that the blog world (aside from a few reasonable people such as OM and Canonist)has degenerated into the equivalent of a lynch mob so frenzied that the mere mention of any kind of corruption, documented or not, sends them chasing after innocent and guilty alike. This mob is headed by some loud men clothing their identity under white sheets - UOJ and JWB, most notably, but its rank and file are the spiteful anonymous commentors who tar the names of anyone who has a bigger house or more success than they do, as well as the hysterics who see a conspiracy of elders of zion behind every tree. The llonger this atmosphere persists, the more damage will be done to the reputations of innocents. Next time, UOJ will go after an innocent, and then what will happen?

I vote that people make a concerted effort to not rush to beleive something just because it sounds plausible and some schmuck with a blog said it. A little healthy skepticism can go a long way towards making sure this deosnt become a "denounce your neighbor to the authorities" culture.

I once received what I believe was excellent advice from a Rav on educating children about potential predators: he said, in short, "the Torah does not permit people (who are not married to each other) to touch one another in areas normally covered by your swimsuit. Someone who does this is acting inappropriately, and you must leave his/her presence as soon as possible and tell an adult."

Except for the Torah part, this is the exact thing that is told to every public school student from about the 2nd grade on in the United States.

It is sad that such candid statements are rare enough that they need to be labelled "excellent advice."

You failed to address what is really the primary benefit of noisemakers like UOJ and JWB. They are the media that brings issues to the forefront - albeit with questionable tactics. We have nobody else! History has proven so. It unfortunately takes the likes of UOJ to uncover somehting as important as this. It was otherwise ignored and had UOJ not launched the attack, the rebbi in TT would have still been there. Don't trivialize sexual abuse of any kind before you put yourself in the impossibly large shoes of a victim.

Gedolim or not, there MUST be a system of checks and balances - especially since a select (and often corrupt) few run the show.

Inquirer and Fox you both make excellent points, however what scares me is the lack of coverage on this matter. Not one word from any Rov/Rosh Yeshiva/Organization. This shows we still need people like UOJ.

But is everyone here comfortable with the numerous innocent people UOJ has accused in the past year? Do we say - hey he did a good job with this one so lets assume he's 100% right about all his accusations? I say, my attitude towards him remains guarded, since his bad at least equals his good.

Um, right. I failed to discuss the benefits or disadvantages of noisemakers. That wasn't really the point of my post. There are obviously occasions when "noisemaking" is required.

I certainly don't intend to trivialize anyone's nesyonos. But why would you insult victims by desribing their shoes as "impossibly large" to fill? As hurtful as it must be to experience disbelief, it must be even more painful to be dismissed permanently as "damaged goods" whose scars are automatically assumed to be so deep as to defy healing.

Being calmly compassionate is a trait of chesed; being horrified by another's experience, no matter how understandable, is an act of cruelty.

This topic has stirred conversations between my children and myself about the state of their own school and teachers. The modern schools are not immune, either. My children go to one of the best known, modern schools in Flatbush and when I questioned my son he told me about a teacher, a 60something year old man, who was never married and fancies himself some sort of "counselor" to the boys. (The school is co-ed, apparently he doesn't think the girls need his help) After giving the students a lengthy, in depth personality survey, he hand picks some of the boys and they have one on one meetings. In these meetings he discusses everything from masturbation to their relationships with girls. Apparently, he gets his jollies from knowing how often they masturbate.

I have called the school and discussed the issue with the powers that be. It will be interesting to see what, if anything, is done.

I got your point - being horrified, according to you, makes a victim feel even more worthless...but, for many victims, the scars never heal. The damage from even "minor" incidents can be colossal.

When this issue is ignored and the victims' pleas fall on deaf ears, THAT is horrifying. When people who have been abused see the disgusting response and the apathy exhibited by the many opponents, ensuring that they will never come forward, THAT is horrifying.

Why? Because it's impossible to disagree with your perspective?Actually, inquirer, I've been employed in the past by an organization that provides services for victims of abuse and/or assault as well as families who've lost children through violent crimes, among other issues.

One of biggest sources of unhappiness they brought up in group and individual therapy: people who find out about their history treat them as freaks of some sort and can never take their experiences in stride. Horror is not support, sympathy, or confidence in another's ability to transcend bad things. It's an emotional response that says, "What happened to you is so awful that I can't think of you as normal."

It's fine to be angry at the perpetrators. It's fine to be angry at figures of authority who condone inappropriate actions through their silence. It's fine to demand changes. Sometimes it's fine to go to fairly strenuous lengths to enact changes. It's *not* fine to stigmatize the subject by using language or analogies that further alienate the victims simply because we think it shows how much we care.

I ask you this: a world of inquiry where there are no checks and balances, where any schmuck's power to defame is as attainable as an anonymous handle, a keyboard and a lot of time on his hands, where nothing but good will stands between innocent people and the ruination of their names - is such a world something you think is a positive place?

I do not question the value in exposing molesters, particularly in this case. I question the lack of safeguards surrounding the methods by which those offenders are prosecuted. If this individual accused had been a muslim and had been tortured to divulge information, you'd be squawking about the evil republicans. So which is it - when bloggers trample on the assumption of innocence until proven guilty it's acceptable, but when the government (especially the bush government) does it its wrong?

A system of safeguards exists in our criminal justice system. No man can be accused or tried without facing his court and accuser. No one can be tried without due process and appropriate counsel. How about in the self-appointed court of the blog world? Is its unmitigated power not frightening to you?

It scares the heck out of me, just as much as the thought of limitless presidental wiretapping ability.

To keep returning the discussion to this individual accused (one that is not in question) is missing the overarching issue this problem raises: are any means justified in bringing people like this to justice? Or are there basic decencies to which, as a civilized society, we MUST adhere both in our quest for truth and our quest for redress?

If your answer is no, I dont see how you can justify not heading into brooklyn at the head of a lynch mob this evening and stringing up the accused subjects of the NY mag article. For that matter, I dont see how you can hold our government to a higher standard of behvaior than you do yourself.

In the interests of intelligent discussion, if you value such, please address my point here, and refrain from returning to the same hackneyed position of "he molested kids, the evil rabbis covered it up, uoj is a hero, yay blogs!" that's been everyone's canard from JWB to UOJ's mindless legion of groupies.

I seek discourse, not mindless rants from small minded people. Like minded thinkers, please respond in kind.

If I hear the word "gedolim" one more time, I will scream. If these so-called "gedolim" knew that a predator was loose among a schoolful of children and they did nothing about it, they're nothing but criminals. Accessories.

Judaism isn't Catholicism- we don't assume that our rabbis have a direct line to God. They are simply men. Just as these "gedolim" are no closer to God than the average man. They might be more learned, but that's the only difference. And if they let children be abused this way, the hell with them. I hoped they're charged as accessories and are publicly shamed for what they did- and didn't do.

the latest story that was published happened years ago. i was speaking to someone in this persons class and he had the same rebbi, he said firstly this rebbe never would do this and most importantly said the kid was known to be "high" and a chip on his shoulder out to get anyone he could.just b/c a story is printed it does not mean it is true. is this problem going on, on a constant basis maybe? can all these cases be confirmed, no! a yeshiva will not throw a rebbi out just b/c some drugged up spoiled brat does not like his rebbi. and yes kids and grown ups would and do make stories up even about rebbis even as sickening an act as this. so ortho dont go off the deep end how it is ignored, unless your behind the investigations in all these cases we just dont know if they are being ignored, or simply dismissed b/c it is a lie.

This case is not the only one. There are currently 3 plaintiffs and many more stories. Don't kid yourself. "Drugged up" in 7th grade? I don't think so. "Drugged up" perhaps after the incident - could be.

david I said....its a fact, drugged up before it happened. unless you are in your 50s and was in his class, you have no leg to stand on. this is a huge problem, yes b/c of the acts but also b/c you guys have no clue and in your minds hes guilty. classic loshon hora.two thumbs down to ortho for causing the names to be used. learn halacha just b/c a name is in a paper it does not allow one to read it and certainly not repeat it.

But Rebbe, you are wrong about the denial that goes on in our community. It does.

i agree with the problem but each case is different and the said case here is not correct, and now rabbi. k name is being thrown around this blog and papers when we dont know what happened.check out the blog angrysoul i knew who this kid was and who the accused is i was in camp with them.the fact is there the camp had no idea what was happening. and when they found out well lets just say they are not ignoring it.again i agree this is a problem, but this one case that is being refered to here is not fair. rabbi k is innocent until proven guilty, unfortantly everyone here is talking like he is, this can and will destroypeople and families, soo lets get the facts straight before calling him a mollester.

check out the blog angrysoul i knew who this kid was and who the accused is i was in camp with them.

I will not comment on your protestations of this case being wrong. That is not the point of this post. I do, however, object to your unbelievable hypocrisy here in running to discredit the accuser, and trying to send my readers to a blog where they can join you in doing so.

Before you give me two thumbs down for bringing this subject up, examine your own twisted motives. Ridiculous.

"Not one word from any Rov/Rosh Yeshiva/Organization. This shows we still need people like UOJ"

This is precisely my point. We have accusations and two sides. Even if we all feel and know (or think we know) what happened. Nothing has been proven.

Why are you jumping all over the beards for not saying anything. Has anything been proven. The last time a local Rabbi here jumped in with his opinion on a hot issue before knowing all the facts, he made a fool of himself.

Lets calm down, get to the bottom of this, throw the $%*holes in jail and then start mudslinging.

(NOTE: My Blogger Display Name was intended to be "Halachic Authority?" not "Halachic Authority") *****************************

"Why are you jumping all over the beards for not saying anything? Has anything been proven. The last time a local Rabbi here jumped in with his opinion on a hot issue before knowing all the facts, he made a fool of himself."

OrthoKrum:

I’m surprised at your remarks and, with this opinion, hope you’re once again half-joking. See my post from yesterday.

The Rabbonim have an obligation to say something here. It pains me to sound like the UOJ’s and other (un)notable bloggers of the world, but why are “the beards” so quick to ban books (just one very bad example), and not quick to clarify (or disagree with) what a certain Posek Hador is alleged to have said?

I refuse to criticize their silence on the abuse accusation itself although, if I was counsel to the Agudah, I would heavily lean on them to either (i) make a statement saying that accusations are always taken very seriously by the organization, but until the organization investigates further, they cannot have an “official position” on the matter or (ii) immediately engage independent counsel to investigate, and announce that outside counsel will handle going forward (didn’t the OU engage DPW in the [●] scandal? Maybe DPW had better litigators back then…).

But OrthoKrum, my friend, why the deafening silence from our leaders (local AND global) on this issue? As I’ve said in other contexts to OrthoMom and others, silence is acquiescence. People – and especially “G’dolei Hador” – have a duty to make a statement about non-penetrating pedophiles in light of UOJ’s and NY Mag’s stories.

And since I’m very blog-speak savvy these days, I “tag” this past Shabbos’ host (for whom I personally have tremendous respect) of this Posek Hador to issue a statement/clarification on this matter. Trust me, he’s doesn’t generally shy away from controversy (and I mean that in a good way – cover those elbow, OM!).

Your hidden messages are lost on me Mr. Authority. I'm not savvy enough for your quick wit and stinging one-liners. But I do know that changing your name from time to time does not hide your true identity.

Imbibe this: You are not to judge, in a public forum, someone who by your own admission is the Posek Hador.

You have issues, questions, accusations keep them to yourself. Or, you can go to Rabbi Ginzburg's house and have a discussion with this posek hador.

Do you have Korachitis?

I emplore you, in the most unattacking manner, don't talk about someone of his stature.

You want to pick on Lipshits and the Yated, fine. You want to attack Zweibel, go right ahead......

Orthokrum:A "posek hador" has to be in touch with the "dor." Failing to address what has become the very public nature of the Rav's purported p'sak is inviting judgment in the public forum, whether you approve of it or not.

momof4,firstly i mentioned angrysoul for you to see. angry soul is not the same person that we are discussing. angrysoul souls violater has admitted to what was done and is currently in counsling. i simply mentioned it to you b/c it is a powerful and scary thing that goes on. i have nothing bad to say about the angrysoul. i am not discrediting angrysoul nor do i want other people to.this case in your blog is diff. and my point is the person had issues before coming to the yeshiva, so lets not call rabbi k. guilty unless we are 100% sure.the problem i had with the post was people in response were throwing out names and i do not agree wiyh that. again that is why i told YOU about angrysoul b/c not once did he mention the accuser or camp, and he asked if you do know keep it to yourself. so i am not sure what twisted motives i have, if you read angrysoul as i did i feel for him an its terriable what happened to him. nothing twisted about that.

the latest story that was published happened years ago. i was speaking to someone in this persons class and he had the same rebbi, he said firstly this rebbe never would do this and most importantly said the kid was known to be "high" and a chip on his shoulder out to get anyone he could.

I agreed that you can take issue with our lay leaders (although I still question whether it can be done publicly).

But there poses a problem with that as well. A practical problem really. If parties are innocent until proven guilty, which I would assume you have to admit is the proper approach - as much as it pains both you and me in this case.

How does, say for example, The Agudah come out with a statement. They'd have to be extremely vague about what prompted the statement and even then it will come across as a vilifying these defendants prematurely.

They are in a very difficult situation....between a Rock and someones hard place, if you will.

momof4All I can say is UGHyour to funny, i never said hes a liar, and could it have happened,yes, but your missing the point, just b/c someone says somthing it doesn't mean its true.S.S was acussed of stealing from certain funds of the american jewish congress, does that mean its true. no.so i dont understand your UGH!,

momof4 All I can say is UGH your to funny, i never said hes a liar, and could it have happened,yes, but your missing the point, just b/c someone says somthing it doesn't mean its true. S.S was acussed of stealing from certain funds of the american jewish congress, does that mean its true. no.so i dont understand your UGH!,

Huh? Let me explain it to you clearly. If you would like to simply say that we shouldn't presume someone is guilty, I will absolutely agree with that. I refused to name the accused, and made it very clear in my post that the crimes right now are simply alleged.

But that is not what you did. You didn't just caution the benefit of the doubt. You hypocritically pointed fingers at the accuser for alleged drug abuse and lying about his claims! How are you following your own advice here?

“I agreed that you can take issue with our lay leaders (although I still question whether it can be done publicly). But there poses a problem with that as well. A practical problem really. If parties are innocent until proven guilty, which I would assume you have to admit is the proper approach - as much as it pains both you and me in this case.”

You seem to be confused. What exactly is the "practical problem" with issuing or clarifying a psak in the name of avoiding a colossal chilul Hashem? Why would anyone be admitting guilt (or even non-innocence) by issuing a very clear statement about halacha while, at the same time, clearly maintaining the non-guilt of these individuals until further investigation?

“How does, say for example, The Agudah come out with a statement. They'd have to be extremely vague about what prompted the statement and even then it will come across as a vilifying these defendants prematurely.”

Vague is fine. Good lawyers know how to be intentionally and ambiguously vague. Yes, some people would criticize the Agudah for issuing a “vague” statement, but most would just be glad to see that someone with a pulse works there.

“They are in a very difficult situation....between a Rock and someones hard place, if you will.”

Gratuitous.

By the way, Mr. OrthoKrum, I know you're no Halachic Authoirty, but I'd be curious to hear your take on whether or not our Torah permits non-penetrating child molestation.

"What exactly is the "practical problem" ...." - Read further for my explanation, oh wait you did and still had to answer my post piece by piece.

"Vague is fine. Good lawyers know how to be intentionally and ambiguously vague. Yes, some people would criticize the Agudah for issuing a “vague” statement, but most would just be glad to see that someone with a pulse works there. "

I don't know what we're talking about here. You agree that we should lay off the higher-ups and I agree that the lay leaders are reproachable, and should issue a statement or something. I just question the practical viability there.

To help move past the "practical problem," set forth below is a draft press statement:

"With regard to the recent lawsuit raising allegations of child abuse against certain members of the community, the [insert name of organization] awaits the conclusions of the court of law adjudicating the suit and reaffirms the jurisprudential principle that an accused is deemed innocent until proven guilty.

However, the [organization] wishes to make its views on child abuse crystal clear: Child abuse in any form is a flagrant violation of halacha and is absolutely prohibited. The touching of a child in a sexual manner is completely proscribed by our Torah and by our traditions. There are no "technical defenses" to child abuse -- any attempt to touch a child in a sexual manner and/or to obtain sexual gratification through children is utterly forbidden.

On behalf of our consituents and of concerned Jews everywhere, the [organization] expresses its profound concern for anyone affected by child abuse in any form. The [organization] will be forming a task force within the next several days to examine the issue of child abuse in the Orthodox community, and more specific proposals will be issued in the coming weeks."

"I don't know what we're talking about here. You agree that we should lay off the higher-ups and I agree that the lay leaders are reproachable, and should issue a statement or something. I just question the practical viability there."

To be clear, I'm not "laying off" anyone. No individual on this earth is beyond reproach. I'm willing to give certain "higher-ups" the benefit of the doubt (that he has no knowledge of this) based on lifelong reputation, but the clock is ticking.

As for the "lay-leaders," most of them have sterling reputations as well. The only reason they cannot be given the benefit of the doubt is because, as a practical matter, it's absurd to think that EVERY SINGLE LAY-LEADER has been shielded from this article and the alleged psak.

I’ll even go one step further than you: Each one of those lay-leaders on an individual basis deserves the same deference as the quoted Posek. As it related to judging favorably, I see absolutely no difference between “the” Posek and, say, our Rov – I’m not sure how you can think otherwise. But collectively, it's too far a stretch to give the group the benefit of the doubt. You need to have some sort of plausible explanation to judge favorably. All of us alive today are eye-witnesses to this silence and acquiescence.

And don’t even try the ole “they are much greater than us, who are we to say…” argument. With that logic, if the molestation and cover-up allegations are true, people who respect the pedophile and his co-conspirators for their prior good acts and reputations, can continue to support proven criminals and use that line as an excuse.

To me, the collective silence is proven guilt and, as a group, our lay-leaders are guilty of facilitating chilul Hashem throughout the world. Deal with it, OrthoKrum.

New to this so I'm gonna just give all my opinions at once in no specific order...Rebba-What? I'm sorry but I don't see any consistency or logic in the things you're saying. Proving that hearsay is not true based on other hearsay? Excuse me if I have to skip that.

Lashon Hara is lashon hara, period. Whether it's about a posek hador or a "hedyot". All of klal yisrael are called Hashem's children, and we can't spread LH about any of them. True statementsincluded. Any person of any stature.Showing horror is different than making someone feel like a freak. To show a victim that you are horrified that someone could do such a thing can make that person feel cared for and protected, something someone in such a situation needs more than anything. But I'm with fox;to blow something way out of proportion consistently just because it makes us feel like we're accomplishing something by making a fuss accomplishes nothing except for making victims feel like they can never be normal again. And that it a crime which, if not as objectively cruel as the abuse, is thoughtless and just as damaging.Sefardilady-the truth is, our society is different, and sexuality isn't something we speak openly most of the time- I think we keep it precious that way. So to be able to articulate advice to young children on such a delicate topic clearly and openly on the one hand, and with sensitivity to its private nature on the other, is an accomplishment. If we could all get that balance, then talking about abuse that goes on in our community wouldn't be so hard.

Nice segue into a "first-class" discussion about rebbas' airline rituals (or was it a reference to the victims not accurately remembering something/body from years past? -- "let me see your wallet!), but I'd really like to see a non-nasal analysis of the issue.

Okay -- I'm going out on a limb here, but I have what I believe to be a legitimate question.

My question is whether parents adequately listen and interpret the spoken and unspoken messages of victims. Let me be more specific: in not all, but most cases, victims communicate a desire to avoid contact with the abuser.

Some individuals are able to say, "So-and-so makes me uncomfortable." Others may use secondary means to avoid contact. Every parenting and women's magazine in the last two decades has run multiple articles on how to spot signs of abuse. Maybe we are doing a bad job of disseminating this information to parents in our community if literally *no one* believes the victim.

For example, I had an employee several years ago who came to me privately and told me her immediate supervisor made her uncomfortable with some of his comments. After a low-key investigation that revealed to me that the supervisor was likely a jerk and the employee may have been oversensitive, I reassigned her as soon as it was feasible. Even though nothing could be proven, I felt this was a bad scene just waiting to happen.

Would I be less vigilant with my kids? No way! If my kids expressed discomfort *or* I felt uneasy with what they were telling (or not telling) me, I'd vote with my feet and get them out of the situation before I worried who was culpable.

Don't misunderstand: I'm not trying to get anyone "off the hook" who should have taken action. But I'd much rather we do what's necessary to deprive predators of easy pickings rather than parcel out the blame after the fact.

In fact, there's entire genre of "how not to be a victim" research and writing would be beneficial to everyone. Now, if any of those of us who've found time to comment here could take our writing talents and produce a Torah-appropriate piece that addresses the specific characteristics of the frum community, *that* would be a contribution!

"Now, if any of those of us who've found time to comment here could take our writing talents and produce a Torah-appropriate piece that addresses the specific characteristics of the frum community, *that* would be a contribution!"

I'm somewhat disappointed to learn that you've been perusing these posts over the last couple of days, and yet haven't commented on the halachic issues raised on this blog.

Based on your most recent post on your own blog, and based on other past exchanges I've had with you, I believe reading YOUR take on whether or not our Torah permits non-penetrating child molestation would be beneficial to all of us (even if you disagree with me).

And if the answer is no, now that you've adequately established your Shmiras Haloshon expertise, can we -- as halachic Jews -- voice our opinion on this matter publicly (i.e., the matter of collective Rabbinic silence)?

Halachic, on your first question, I agree with the position you expressed above regarding permissibility of child molestation, although I admit that it would be great if Halakha would be more emphatic on the matter. The halachos do not address the aspect of the act that most of us find most reprehensible, that is, the nonconsensual nature of the contact and the fact that the victim is a young boy. The sanctions that the Torah would apply to the act in question would be no different then if the boy wasn't there, or if the boy were a consenting adult. That troubles me.

As for the Lashon Hara issue, I am not an expert on the matter, and I don't know why you would say that my post indicates I am. I do think (as I said inthe post) that the CC notwithstanding, a better approach to LH would consist of a balance of values rather than a strict set of rules. Of course, this is academic, because who am I to argue on the Chafetz Chaim?

Although I did not address them in my initial post in detail, I do believe that other bases exist. For instance, the Choshen Mishpat principles of “Mazik” would certainly apply to inappropriate contact, and psychological damage is certainly recognized in Halacha. Moreover, damages caused to a child as a result of molestation, would obviously be far greater than those caused by a slap in the face (if Gil is a child psychologist, he can weigh in on this as well – by the way, who’s Gil?).

So Krum, although not detailed (but certainly mentioned) in my initial post, the wrongdoing based on the non-consensual element of this alleged contact is most definitely well-grounded in Halacha.

In other words, if a 12-year-old had the capacity to consent to being damaged (and I believe the age for consent capacity under Jewish law is 13 – which, generally, is unfortunate, but in this case would still be enough), then the only problem would be the “abizrayoo d’arayos” issue raised in my original post as applied to Mishkav Zachor.

Since, however, a 12-year-old does not have the capacity to consent to any inappropriate act -- be it a slap in the face or a touch of the genitals -- these alleged vile acts fall squarely within the Choshen Mishpat parameters of a “Mazik.”

To close the loop, while the halachos in Choshen Mishpat may only apply to civil damages, the corresponding sources in Sanhedrin would qualify these acts for criminal prosecution under Jewish law, if we had a Jewish criminal justice system today.

Finally, Krum, proceeding on the assumption that a “balance of values” approach is correct, how would you answer the question posed to you? Note that the first part of the question has no connection with the Loshon Harah aspect of this dialogue.

***Should Rabbinic authorities (whoever they may be), as representatives of the institution of Halachic Orthodox Jewry, have an obligation to clarify the halachic prohibitions on non-penetrating child molestation? If yes, and if they fail to do so, would the “balanced values” approach permit public criticism of the deafening silence?***

Halachic, thank you for the additional sources. What do you mean by "the corresponding sources in Sanhedrin would qualify these acts for criminal prosecution under Jewish law"? What "corresponding sources"?

As to your first question, yes, I agree with you that the Orthodox rabbinic leadership should make it clear that the alleged psak is wrong. I look around the web shows that the alleged psak has become the object of much fun by many bloggers and commenters, which, I am sure is a reflection of what non-bloggers (they are people too!) think.

As to your second question, are you asking me what my made up approach to Lashon Hara would dictate? It's complicated. On the one hand, the damage being caused by the alleged psak is greater, in my opinion, than any damage that would be done by effective, respectful criticism. On the other hand, perhaps the Gedolim can be prodded without result to public expression. On the third hand, criticism expressed publicly on a blog may be the best way for people to discuss this matter in a frank and open matter. There may be other considerations that I can't think of. In any case, the approach under my made-up LH doctrine would require balancing these considerations and choosing the course that works the best.

The gemara I had in mind when typing my message was towards the bottom of 41a. But you are correct (good catch), that is referring to the Sanhedrin no longer convening, and not penal law "corresponding sources" (although some can be found there, my reference was incorrect).

Sefardilady-the truth is, our society is different, and sexuality isn't something we speak openly most of the time- I think we keep it precious that way. So to be able to articulate advice to young children on such a delicate topic clearly and openly on the one hand, and with sensitivity to its private nature on the other, is an accomplishment. If we could all get that balance, then talking about abuse that goes on in our community wouldn't be so hard.

EEM-You are correct, we are different! We have halacha, we have Torah.

We have laws of yichud that do not allow a 9 year old boy to be alone with a female that is not his mother/grandmother/siblings. We have laws of yichud that do not allow a 3 year old girl to be alone with a male except her father/grandfather/siblings.

We have laws of tzniut that do not allow two males to sleep together in the same bed. We have laws of tzniut that do not allow a female to uncover certain body parts in public starting at certain ages (3, 6/7, 12).

Every child should know that it is absolutely imperative that he or she not be made uncomfortable and not be touched in private places.

To discuss these facts is NOT having a conversation about sex, chas v'shalom. It is to have a conversation about dignity, comfort, halacha.

Unfortunately, if our own leaders cannot come to a level of comfort to discuss these subjects in a clear and concise fashion that makes children comfortable approaching an adult, than we need to approach other people who can teach us how to do so.

And, lastly, it is absolutely imperative that authority figures be make aware that they need to protect themselves from accusations by being professional. It is ridiculous not to protect oneself. More on my blog hopefully by tomorrow night.

HAPPYWITHHISLOT,READ WHAT I WROTE, i did not call him a liar, in fact i said the counslour admitted to it and was forced into rehab. angrysoul is telling the truth.but es the camp when they did find out about dont doubt hes telling the truth, and are trying to do what they can.so please dont say things that i didnt say.

rebbaangry claims they did know.If everything else he said was true, and he was accused on the blog of lying also (the ferarri seems to bother people)then why shouldnt i believe that the camp was told but either was too dumb to understand the situation, or was negligent (grossly or criminally)

And I want to know why this counselors name is not being disclosed.

By the way, the case was referenced it seems in the New York mag article.